BANSILAL DULICHAND RATHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-original accused has preferred this revision application against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhir dated 24th May, 1976 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner as appellant in Appeal No. 58 of 1975 had been dismissed. This appeal was from the judgment and order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Gevrai on 23rd July, 1975, convicting the petitioner-original accused under section 7(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,200/- in default to suffer further R.I. for three months.

(2.) Mr. A.V. Savant appearing for the petitioner, submitted before me that though this is a criminal revision application, there is a patent error by the learned Additional Sessions Judge as well as by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, in coming to the conclusion that the accused was guilty of charge with which he was charged. He submitted that this error has arisen because of non-appreciation of evidence and not properly understanding the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act with the Rules framed thereunder.

(3.) The facts are stated in detail in both the judgments and I need not repeat the same. Ex. 39 of the original record reads the charge against the accused as under :---